President Obama, Obamacare, and extortion

President Barack Obama speaks about the budget and the partial government shutdown at the White House on Oct. 8. (Pablo Martinez Monsivais, The Associated Press)

President Obama, referring to House Republican efforts to defund or delay the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act during the budget stalemate, said, “We can’t make extortion routine as part of our democracy. Democracy doesn’t function this way.”

What is extortion, Mr. President? Taking money by means of coercion, right? A good example might be mandating that an individual purchase a product, whether he wants it or not. Or else be fined. N’est-ce pas?

So we’re agreed, then, that such a practice is something that must not become routine in our democracy, because democracy doesn’t function this way? How heartening it is to hear that Obama is on the same page as the majority of Americans who hate his health care debacle.

Only in the looking-glass world of Washington is it extortion to try to block extortion. (“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”)

Cameron Graham, Arvada

This letter was published in the Oct. 17 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Don’t be obtuse, Cameron. The extortion we’re talking about is the Tea Party GOP’s attempt to pervert the legislative process defined by the Constitution, while threatening to tank the economy.

The time negotiate the ACA was in 2009 and 2010. It’s law now, with the stamp of approval from the most conservative Supreme Court in memory.

The only thing that depresses me about today… is that we get the privilege of going through it all over again in a few months.

thor

“The time negotiate the ACA was in 2009 and 2010.” Funny. LOL funny. You are correct in stating that the time to negotiate was before the massive bill was passed. And had the Democrats welcomed negotiations, maybe a better bill would have been crafted.

Tbone

Personally, myself, as well as everyone else living in reality, remembers about 6 months of negotiation.

guest

And who were they negotiating with? Blue Dog Democrats.

thor

And in the end there was a vote on a bill that nobody read and that didn’t garner one Republican vote. True negotiations would have some Republican support, or Democrat support if the shoe was on the other foot. That is reality, do you remember that.

toohip

you forgot to mention how many pages it is (remember your argument that lengthy bills are bad for the people?), or death panels, or how it’s as bad as slavery?

Tbone

Good point, thanks for bringing that up, thor. The democrats made the mistake of taking republicans for their word, thinking the repubs were negotiating in good faith.

As it turns out, the dems were willing to negotiate and drop some of their ideas, only to have the repubs turn around and stab them in the back. The repubs voted no even after dems dropped some of their demands.

Thanks for reminding us that repubs won’t negotiate in good faith.

guest

55555555555555555555555

peterpi

You can create 1000 5s almost as easily as 23.

One suffices.
Or, you could actually try a coherent reply.

holyreality

Seriously?The GOP obstruction over a bill that basically surrendered everything about healthcare reform except a few crumbs about preexisting conditions and revenues paying for coverage IS THE COMPROMISE.
Feckless Dems gave up single payer, and public option hours into the process while the Bob Dole answer to the Clinton attempt in the 90s became the centerpiece of the new law.
True negotiations? Republican support was suppressed by the obstructionist leadership who publicly declared their goal of making the President fail for the 2012 election. Any GOP representative or senator faces being primaried for betraying the crazies.
Your “reality” lies within the bubble carefully crafted by the Koch Brother/Sheldon Addleson noise machine.

guest

Yawn.

holyreality

Go to sleep, when you wake up in 2015 the GOP will be as relevant as the whigs.

MD

Yep, and the Republicans offered a great deal of input. By the way, let’s not forget that the idea of a mandate for everyone to purchase health coverage was originally a Republican idea (until it wasn’t under the GOP “get Obama” mission).

guest

Do you want to tell me how this “Republican idea” came out, was debated and found to be the best choice by the Republican party?

peterpi

It was advocated by the Heritage Foundation, I think it was part of the McCain plan, other conservative groups espoused it — and then Obama endorsed it and it became a tyrannical commie socialist plot to take away our freedom to be sick.

guest

Back 20 years ago, the idea was floated and supported by 21 Republican Senators. McCain was one, but he never endorsed it in 2008 while running for President.

It sounds as if you would be for the Employee Free Choice Act if you want some thing someone supported twenty years ago to be valid today.

peterpi

Pure revisionism on your part.
And the Tea Party is engaging in extortion.
The GOP sat on its hands during the passage of the ACA, and didn’t co-operate. From day one, they didn’t want to negotiate, it was “No! Not now! Not ever!”

thor

“And the Tea Party is engaging in extortion.” Don’t you get tired of posting stupid? As for the GOP not negotiating, prove it! (And don’t go to the “Romneycare” card because it won’t play. We aren’t talking about a state, but a national law.)

Guest

” Don’t you get tired of posting stupid?”
You certainly don’t!

toohip

don’t you get tired of labeling? what happened to state’s rights? or is it just what ever is convenient to support/reject based on which fits an agenda, or “gets Obama?”

reinhold23

So you’ve just forgotten, to name one example, removing the public option during the negotiations?

thor

How about the things rejected, like health savings accounts, or things added that have hurt the economy, like mandatory compliance.

toohip

you mean like the mandatory compliance the Republican were for before they were against it?

guest

But who removed the public option? Check it out and Tom Harkins blames Max Baucus, Harry Reid and President Obama. No mention of a Republican or even the Tea Party.

Tbone

That’s how negotiation works. My side takes something off the table, your side takes something off the table.

guest

I always thought you put something on the table. I guess it is different with the Democratic party of NO.

Tbone

DERP DERP DERP I DONT UNDERSTHAND HOW NEGOSHEASHION WORKS.

reinhold23

The intent was also there to lure some GOP votes, but they were ultimately in lockstop against doing anything.

guest

So you are saying they weren’t trying to keep Joe Lieberman as the 60th vote? If Obama really had compromised with the Republicans, don’t you think they could have gotten at least one Republican vote?

reinhold23

Are you really saying that Republicans wanted the public option?

As if a shift in strategy couldn’t serve more than one purpose….

tomfromthenews

Don’t make me laugh! The obstructionists would have never rested until the ACA was dismantled and destroyed, ensuring the continuation of the unfair and exclusionary practices of the past. “Better bill” indeed! LOL.

thor

You make me laugh most of the time, so we are even. And you are right about the “Better bill.” Indeed. But until cooler heads prevail, we will be stuck with a bad bill. Maybe, in 2014, enough people will be unelectd that Congress will be able to do what the majority of the people want. They will repeal and replace Obamacare. One can only hope.

tomfromthenews

If you think more Republicans will be elected in 2014 after the events of the last 16 days, you are truly delusional. The Republican Party is split and in tatters. And, were you able to repeal Obamacare, what would you say to the people who obtained insurance under the ACA? “Sorry, you are uninsured now”?

peterpi

Sounds about right.

toohip

give it enough time (what they fear) and in 2014 when the mythological Republican Senate take over materializes and they try to take away affordable health care to people previously denied due to pre-existing conditions, and watch the rebellion! And this time it won’t be a generic blaming of Congress but one party!

thor

Who are “they?”

toohip

your club

guest

If you think people will remember the last sixteen days a year from now, you are delusional. It will be the current events and I’m thinking Obamacare will be one of them.

tomfromthenews

If you think the Dems will let people forget WHO caused us to nearly default, taking much of the world economy with us (hint: it wasn’t the Dems), they YOU are…well, you know. This shutdown will be a big part of midterm elections and the general election in ’16. The Tea Party will be shown the door.

guest

Dreamer. The shut down has hurt both parties. In a recent poll Obama’s popularity was down to 37% with only 16% of independents finding his performance positive.

Tbone

Yea, but those numbers need to be unskewed (TM) before they begin to approach reality.

thor

Yes, skewed by Democrat strategists.

thor

Many of the PEOPLE think it was President Obama who caused the near default.

peterpi

To add on to tomfromthenews
in 1995, there was a shutdown. In 1996, Dems successfully used news accounts that Newt Gingrich had a temper tantrum over not being able to hitch a ride on Air Force One for a trip to Israel, and tied it to Republican tantrums over the shutdown. Now, it wasn’t the only campaign theme, but it was one of them, and Clinton got re-elected, and the House Republican majority shrank.

guest

Clinton did get reelected. But do your remember what the shutdown was over? It was about the budget. And the Republicans got Clinton to sign off on cut spending and we actually had a surplus in the budget. As I recall, Clinton used the strategy of triangulation to win and the Republicans held onto the House and Senate for another 10 years.

thor

But it was maintained. And now we have President Obama throwing a temper tantrum. Very cool.

thor

Polls of likely voters, as opposed to registered voters, tell a different story. But hold on to your delusion until after the 2014 election. Then, don’t cry on my shoulder.

tomfromthenews

Coming from the same camp that was SO SURE Romney would win in ’12. Your shoulder is safe.

thor

Romney lost because 4 million registered Republicans stayed home in ’12. Don’t count on that happening again.

tomfromthenews

I guess it’s possible to convince yourself of anything. The Republican party is in utter chaos. I don’t understand why Boehner is even still House Speaker.

thor

If you went to Rachel Maddow for your source, no wonder you think the Republican Party is in chaos. We have 30 governorships and a majority of the state legislations. We have rising stars like Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and Marco Rubio. We are far from being in chaos.

tomfromthenews

“30 governorships and a majority of the state legislations [sic]” for now. And after the last three weeks, your “rising stars” are more like wrecking balls. They are three of the reasons why your party is so divided right now.

thor

We have 30 governorships because we are winning local battles where governing bodies have to balance the books. Wisconsin is a great example. But, like someone said, you don’t vote against Santa, so Democrats are still winning some national elections. If voters could see past the Democratic promises, more would vote for Republicans. But keep telling yourself we are divided, it will help us regain our focus.

tomfromthenews

EVERYONE, including powerful forces in the GOP, acknowledges the Republicans are scattered and divided, all thanks to the Tea Party. And since you say you need “help” to “regain our focus”, you acknowledge this. The Democratic promises have been PREVENTED from happening by obstructionist “party of No” Republicans who themselves have NOTHING to promise or offer.

thor

tom, all Democrats have is promises. But promises won’t employ people out of work. Removing obstacles like Obamacare, over-regulations and high corporate tax rates will help get our economy going again. But common sense won’t buy votes, so you will attempt to create the impression that Democrats have the best promises, er, answers.

tomfromthenews

Something is better than nothing.

toohip

ooooh, Tom! Tom! You insulted the right with a (gulp!) FEMALE pundit! You know how these misogynistic types think about women (why they hate Pelosi, Hillary. .). Not thor, of course, he’s a free-thinker! Tell us thor, where is that great female hope from the right?

thor

Why are you repying to me and talking to tom? And what is the weird (gulp) thing that you do. Is it that odd that a female is a pundit. Look at Laura Ingraham, who is way more capable than Rachel Maddow. And why do you throw around misogynist as if someone really behaved as one? Its like using “racist” isn’t it. A person doesn’t need to be guilty of racism for a liberal to throw around that term. Like you liberals love to say “pitiful.”

toohip

buwahahahah! yeah. sure. Republiclans always get the better turn out, because old retired white people don’t have to try to get off work and stand in long lines in voter suppression states, like non-white, working people!

Dave52

Replace with what, for Gods sake?

toohip

see. . that’s exactly one of the Republican’s problems. . they’re always against something, but never have an alternative answer. . and again, where’s that jobs bill?

thor

Ask the Democrats.

toohip

ask the obstructionists when ever the Democrats propose something and they kill it!

Tbone

Nothing.

thor

Dave, you must be new on this blog, so you have not read my alternative ideas. Let me help you so that you will no longer be an uninformed voter. 1. Allow people to purchase health insurance fro anywhere in the country. Competition always drives down prices. 2. Let people set up health savings accounts. It is always cheaper to pay for doctors visits with cash instead of using insurance. Doctors spend way too much money jumping through insurance hoops. 3. tort reform would help with frivolous law suits that cause doctors to order too many test, which drives up the cost of the doctors insurance coverage.

Dave52

Thor, I’ve spent the past 15 years dealing with a recurring autoimmune nerve disease, myriad insurance companies, health plans, doctors, hospitals, and so on. On the individual market, where prices are at least 50% higher than anywhere else. So I’ve had the, um, ‘opportunity’ to explore, with a personal stake, as in several hundred thousand dollars, all kinds of insurance options over the years. So, 1) what you’re saying is that we should be able to buy insurance in the state with the least regulations. Like credit cards. Hows that worked out? Cheaper? Not from what I’ve seen. All you have is less recourse in a dispute. 2) A health care savings account won’t get you far beyond the occasional dr visit and lab work. Call it $500 a year. Beyond that, prices are so absurdly high that it makes a savings account is a joke – wife having a baby? That’ll be $15,000 – $30,000. I personally spend $6,000 a year on prescription medications alone – A visit to the neurologist costs me $800 – I go twice a year. I have a family with minor children as well – they get expensive. How much should I put in a medical savings account? 3) As for tort reform, its pretty easy to check up on costs where the states have clamped down on law suits, like Florida, California and Colorado – which has a limit on punitive damages. It has made no measurable difference at all.

No, lets get the medical equipment and pharmaceutical companies out of the business of bribing congress, lets get rid of the medical leech industry, aka for-profit insurance, lets get single payer and negotiate with the suppliers. Like they do everywhere else in the world with better outcomes and much lower costs.

tomfromthenews

Thank you for sharing your challenging life experience, Dave. Somehow, I doubt it will get through to the likes of thor. The ACA is here now and, at 2000+ pages, it can be nothing but evil!

toohip

Oooooooh! sudden flip-flop by thor must be off the “thor”orzine! He’s gone from “ACA” and “can’t we improve it” to. . “Obamacare” and “repeal it!” (I guess he had a ever but brief “free-thinking” rational moment, but the right-wing rationale kicked back in?

tomfromthenews

He remembered that it is 2000+ pages or something which seems to be his biggest complaint. I’m sure if Obama had been left to his original idea, without all his NEGOTIATING, COMPROMISING, and CONCEDING TO DEMANDS, the bill would be much shorter. (Oh, wait, I forgot: it’s OBAMA who “refused to negotiate”. Riiiiiight.)

peterpi

Since the Republicans were so intransigent, and since the Dems had just enough votes to override Republicans’ stall tactics provided all the Dems stayed on board, Joe Lieberman — US senator from the insurance industry — wielded enormous influence.
Had even a handful of Republicans offered compromise, Lieberman’s influence would have been blocked, and the bill might have been cleaner and leaner.
But, Lieberman blocked “single payer”, Lieberman turned the bill into a Health Insurance Company Profit Protection Act.
thor, however, would never blame Republicans, no, siree.
Republicans are always honest, loyal, chaste, generous, fair, open, honest in thor’s eyes.
It’s only Democrats who are malevolent and diabolical.

guest

So you admit the Obama was not compromising with the Republicans?

peterpi

What part of “the Republicans were instransigent” don’t you understand?
I see we’re back to the “godfather Corleone blaming the death of the horse on the movie producer” alternative reality.

guest

The Republicans were intransigent but the Democrats didn’t need them so they simply ignore them. No one blame the death of the horse on the movie producer (what version of the movie did you see).

Tbone

No, they won’t. I haven’t even heard a repub mutter the word “replace” in about 9 months.

peterpi

Their replacement is 2 sentences long:
Buy your own health insurance, at whatever price the market will bear! If you can’t afford health insurance, don’t get sick!

toohip

a better bill could be crafted? olive leaf? Definition: trust us, we just want to make ACA er. better! “(notice thor did not call it “Obamacare”) (I have this beachfront property in Nevada I can give you a great deal on !)

tomfromthenews

The fact that he called it ACA is a small victory at least.

peterpi

Spot on comments.
Regarding your last sentence, that’s how the Tea Partiers want it. Perpetual wearing down of Obama, perpetual state of crisis, no sense of stability. Just pound on him, make him pay for being president.
Boehner could put together a coalition of sensible Republicans and the Democrats, and form a majority that would get things done, just like the Democratic leadership in the mid 1960s put together a coalition of sensible Democrats and the Republicans to get the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act passed. But Boehner won’t do it.
The Tea Party Republicans, however, wouldn’t even recognize the mid-1960s Republicans as Republican. At best, they’d be called RINOs.

thor

I know for sure that the Democrats today do not in any way resemble the party I belonged to when I registered to vote in 1972. After voting for Carter in ’76, I became an Independent and haven’t looked back.

toohip

ah, yes, the free thinkers attempt to deflect and disassociate with a dying brand! And you want us to believe you voted for one of the biggest liberals in Presidential history, and are not an “independent” with all the comments you’ve been making? And I own an AR-15 with 100 round magazine, voted for GW in 2000 (twice), and a card carrying member of the TeaHadis!

toohip

it’s called being “primary’ed” The “get Obama movement,” keep failing because they’re too sidetracked by this single-issue, as the party crumbles around them. Even John McCain is calling them out. The Grand Old Party is slowly fading a way. Unless they get a clue what the Tea Party is doing to the party, they will lose the House come 2014. They would of lost in 2012, but thanks to gerrymandering, managed to retain it.

toohip

and the Republicans are hoping next time the people won’t notice the man behind the curtain!

ZZ_man

“It’s law now…”
So was slavery at one time. People aren’t going to rest until this law is repealed or rendered moot.

thor

Extortion, along with hostage and ransom and terrorists, were words used by the President to describe Republicans who opposed Obamacare and wanted to make some reasonable changes during the budget negotiations. Does it make sense for a sitting president to paint such a negative picture of the opposing party? And did he think the voting public would transfer all of their displeasure for the current state of affairs to the Republicans. Most Americans have seen through the charade and are mad at all of Washington.

Tbone

You’re either with us or you’re again’ us.

toohip

regarding the Republican party, the people are starting to suggest the latter

peterpi

“Does it make sense for the president …”?
Yes, if it’s the truth.

tomfromthenews

Yep, if the shoe fits…

thor

On who, the President?

toohip

you’re so clever! not!

thor

Ah, good point. If its true. Too bad that the Presidents words are being used to try to gain political gain and truth had nothing to do with it. Unless one turned the tables and it becomes the President who is guilty of extortion. (Actually, neither the President nor Congress is guilty of extortion. Its just a bunch of political rhetoric.)

toohip

Fail. Keep trying thor, but try to come up with something more original then regurgitating Fox News talking points.

SDaedalus

Does it make sense for a sitting president to paint such a negative picture of the opposing party [using words like extortion, hostage, ransom and terrorists]? And did he think the voting public would transfer all of their displeasure for the current state of affairs to the Republicans.

Yes. It made perfect sense for Obama to use those phrases as well as for him to correctly predict that the Republicans would receive most (though not “all”) of the voting public’s displeasure for the shutdown/debt ceiling crisis.

There was never anything illegal or even unconstitutional about what the House GOP did…rather it was a political gambit, a very bold one with some huge potential upside (the ability to amend a law that they were unable to do via the full legislative process and ballot box, yay!), but some significant downside political risks. This strategy depended on Obama blinking first, and the House GOP didn’t seem to even consider that he may have felt in a superior negotiating position all along — the status quo (ACA/Obamacare remaining law of the land without change) was simply better than any of the “offers” the House GOP were making to defund/delay the law.

The reason Obama used words like ‘extortion’ and ‘hostage’ was to frame his opponents in this political game-of-chicken with simple words and concepts that he/advisors believed would resonate among the average voter. Was this true “extortion” in the legal sense? No, of course not. But in realm of political hyperbole, it was close enough. The House GOP certainly was free to do the same — they could have come up with their own pithy one-word characterizations of Obama (negative) or their own position (positive). In this regard they really were lacking, and in the end, they seemed to try-on-for-size the same words that Obama was using…without irony. At best it wasn’t effective…but felt politically surreal to watch, given the paper-trail left by some of the Tea Party underwriters (Heritage Action, etc) over the past several months outlining the how/why of this leverage-of-catastrophe strategy.

As to Obama’s correct political calculations…I don’t think it took a genius to recognize and seize the advantage from the GOP’s unforced political errors and disarray (ex. Sen. Cruz goading the House GOP to take a plunge that he was not even willing to do himself in the end…the House GOP not being able to come up with a common understanding of what they wanted in a C.R. yesterday).

And believe it or not, it is quite possible that Obama was keeping on eye on his legacy and the country’s long term welfare. By ‘not blinking first’ Obama appears to have made peace with a choice of the lesser-of-evils, by accepting the possibility of a shut-down and debt default instead of permitting a single house of Congress to leverage a threat of potential economic catastrophe to achieve policy objectives that could not be won via legislation or ballot box.

tomfromthenews

Bravo. Quite well reasoned and stated.

BlueRoux

You are an idiot. Congress PASSED the Affordable Care Act, and now you teabaggers are extorting the American people in your effort to undermine the Constitution and the American legislative system and force your agenda over the will of the people as expressed by Congress. That is the very definition of tyranny.

guest

Except Obamacare was never the “will of the people.” It was the will of the Democrats. You seem to have a very short memory. You don’t seem to remember the Cornhusker kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, etc. What Obamacare is is the very definition of corruption.

MD

Actually the people were for affordable health care until the Republicans spread lies about death panels, the IRS making your health care decisions, etc., and provided its input, leaving pricing in the hands of the insurance oligopoly, which made it less than affordable for many Americans.

toohip

still clinging to fragile truth that the people don’t want Obamacare which is misleading. 16% of the 54% of the people say they don’t support Obamacare actually want a “better” national health care plan like single payer – that’s a fact. So as your ilk attempt to cling to flimsy facts, and claim Obamacare is as bad as slavery and “definition of corruption” you fail to recognize it’s been the biggest boost to the health care corporations and insurance corporations in a long time. But the more you look at gift horses in the mouth, the more you step backward.

The point is, some of the people who don’t want the ACA are opposed because they think the ACA doesn’t go far enough.
To simply, mindlessly repeat that the majority of Americans are opposed to the ACA as a sound bite for pure free-market Tea Partyism is simplistic beyond belief.
You’d understand that, if you weren’t in your naive partisan mode.

toohip

be afraid, my conservative friend. . be afraid!

“A New York Times/CBS News poll released last week shows, yet again, that the majority of Americans support national health insurance.
The poll, which compares answers to the same questions from 30 years ago, finds that, “59% [of Americans] say the government should provide national health insurance, including 49% who say such insurance should cover all medical problems.”
Only 32% think that insurance should be left to private enterprise.”http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/SunMo_poll_0209.pdf

primafacie

And I’m sure a majority of Americans would support free pizza for lunch every Tuesday. That’s still not good policy.

How was the question phrased? Your link doesn’t indicate that.

But, sure, I’m quite concerned that many people are being conditioned to expect freebies as the normal course rather than planning for their own needs.

MD

It was extortion. As Pete Sessions stated immediately after Obama’s election, the Republicans should adopt the tactics of insurgency — learn from Al Qaeda, which they have since day one of the Obama administration. Reeks of insurgency to me.

toohip

“Does it make sense for a sitting president to paint such a negative picture of the opposing party?” yes, it takes courage, something Obama has lacked up to now. The Republicans were counting on Obama and the Dems to crack and give them what they want, but they didn’t, and guess who blinked?

“Most Americans have seen through the charade and are mad at all of Washington.” This is what you hoped for – spreading the blame, and for a while it worked. Over time 62% of Americans came to blame Republicans for the shut down and refusal to negotiate. The death knell of the Republican party was prophesied by many pundits, naturally from the left, but never stated before.

You’re correct, thor that many low information voters blamed all of Congress and something like 74% wanted to throw out all of Congress and start fresh. But had this shutdown continued to hurt the people more, and the debt ceiling crashed, you would of seen these low information voters DEMAND “information” as to who really is to blame from the Fourth Estate, and the media would of had to speak to the truth to maintain integrity, and the light would be shown on the Tea Party run Republicans to which you subscribe. Your party was smart to n-n-negotiate and c-c-c-compromise to kick the can down the road. . hoping the low information voters looking for jobs and reasonably paying jobs will forget this extortion attempt and you can count on them again to drink the kool aid of Faux News. Good bet, but odds are changing.

Tbone

Only in the right wing bubble is personal responsibility considered extortion.

primafacie

Mandated personal responsibility, required for the sole reason that one is a citizen. There’s the distinction.

Although I wouldn’t, and haven’t, term it extortion. Nannyist governmental intrusion is more accurate.

peterpi

Ha, ha.
The Tea Partiers are making extortion into an art. Don Corleone could take lessons. Don’t cut off the horse’s head. Arrange for it to only get 90 days worth of food and care. Then start the extortion all over again at the end of the 90 days. Repeat.

thor

Should read, “The Tea Partiers [and the President] are making extortion into an art.” Basically, its those two factions that are at odds. I say pistols at dawn. You can be a second for the President and I will be a second for the TEA Party.

toohip

Thank you! Thank you thor, for aligning your free-thinking self with the group we associate yourself with, but which you deny out of desire for acceptance.

MD

So you believe it’s just fine for our Congress representatives to approve expenses, and then threaten to collapse our economy, and possibly the world’s, by refusing to pay the bills they themselves incurred unless their demands are met? Sorry, I just don’t see it that way.

MD

And the party of “fiscal responsibility” and ignorance thinks nothing of wasting $24 billion taxpayer dollars for no reason whatsoever.

One has to wonder what the next fiasco will cost in terms of taxpayer dollars, more attacks on the sick, on the elderly, and on hungry children.

peterpi

We’ll find out in mid January when Ted Cruz arranges it all over again, and causes a few more House clerks to collapse under the strain.

toohip

should read “rinse and repeat” with the “rinse” being washing your hands of the sins to the people.

Liberals never think of themselves as being……mere extortionists……common thieves…..or petty criminals……..when what they do……is for the betterment of all of “us”……when they collect taxes, mandate fees, and coerce “we the little people” to buy their products and services……..”or else” (fines and imprisonment)……because they…..and only they……the Liberal Elitists…….Know and Understand……through their superior intelligence and wisdom…….what is “best” for “us.”

Never mind that this once-great country was founded NOT on any such principle as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, or Obamacare……..and became the Great Nation it once WAS……in spite of……in spite of……the utter and complete absence of the Liberal Elitist Nonsense,

Never mind the fact that the USSR, Communist China, Communist North Korea, and Communist ANY Country……that took the Liberal Ideology to an Anti-Democracy-Capitalism-American Extreme……failed……as in Always Failed…..because of the Liberal Elitist Nonsense.

Never mind that European Nations that embrace the Liberal Ideology via Socialism……have their own problems with High Taxes, High Unemployment, and Deficits and Debts……..that have stirred the masses to actually RIOT in many European Countries…….when the reality of the Failed Liberal Ideology actually became just that: The Reality……..as in The Reality of a Bankrupt Country that was forced to “restructure” its taxes and “social safety net” in order to receive “bail out funds” to keep quite a number of sinking ships……afloat…..a little while longer…….because of the Liberal Elitist Nonsense.

For the past 4 or 5 years, this country has had Trillion-Dollar Deficits…….and the National Debt has gone from $11 Trillion to $17 Trillion…….and is set to rise once again……to whatever figure Congress agrees to…….and a $20 Trillion National Debt in the next year or two……is actually a very realistic figure.

But whether the Liberals envision themselves as a King George who simply taxed the Colonists because he…..could……or whether they envision themselves as a Robin Hood who “stole from the rich and gave to the poor”……the fact is that many people consider King George to be a no-good tyrant and “Robbing Hood” to be a simple THIEF……who stole money that didn’t belong to him.

But while many people consider King George and Robin Robbing Hood to be……thieves……many Liberal Elitists……simply don’t…….and they look at “taxes” and “taking” as a benevolent service to……..”help us”…..”help ourselves”……because only THEY know and understand what is best for……us little people……who don’t share their intelligence and wisdom………

…………in spite of the fact that human history has proven them to be wrong.

peterpi

Wow, Liberal Elitists, King George, Robin Hood, commies, and European socialists, all in the same comment. You’ve outdone yourself.
“Someone is……confused.”

toohip

(at least he didn’t mention abortion as a cause!)

peterpi

(it must have slipped his mind)

BlueRoux

Step away from the crack pipe.

Jay Jenkins

You know, Robt777, I really wish you’d learn how to write. Your endless use of multiple periods……… is not only boring but wrong. Some of your arguments have merit. Others not so much. But I tend to skip your comments because of their needless length. “Omit needless words”.

holyreality

This grinds my gears.
It is extortion,
the Fabulous Orange Cryer still has on his desk a budget bill from last month that says YES to the Ryan plan. President Obama wanted 1.3 Trillion and Boehner(FOC) stood firm at 999 Billion. The democrats caved and gave the FOC/Ryan everything they wanted, as in slash everything they had on their wish list.
This bill should have been voted on last month, but the Cruz Crazies just had to interfere in some infantile imbecelic manuver that will ruin us.

What REALLY pisses me off is EVERY SINGLE NEWS outlet IGNORED this story.

toohip

The Fourth Estate is dead. All that is left to fight the good fight, is the Fifth Estate.

holyreality

We are anonymous.

Sorry, i can’t make the million mask march November 5th, I need to watch television.

SDaedalus

Cameron Graham from Arvada, CO says:

“What is extortion, Mr. President? Taking money by means of coercion, right? A good example might be mandating that an individual purchase a product, whether he wants it or not. Or else be fined.”

John Roberts of Washington D.C. says:

“The federal government does not have the power to order people to buy health insurance….The federal government does have the power to impose a tax on those without health insurance.” Nat. Fedn. of Indep. Business v. Sebelius, 132 S.Ct. 2566, 2601 (2012)

Mr. Graham may well be one of the last voices we’ll hear with this line of reasoning that the House GOP was in the right to use “extortion to try to block extortion” or some other contrived basis for regarding the ACA/Obamacare as illegitimate (see Krauthammer column from 2 weeks ago some expertly crafted agitprop along these lines).

In the case of the ACA/Obamacare, the U.S. Supreme Court considered the very question of whether or not the federal government could mandate “that an individual purchase a product whether he wants it or not” and in a wonderful twist of irony, SCOTUS said that it did not, affirming what many opponents had said all along. But to the chagrin of anyone seeking to legitimize the House GOP’s coercive tactics over the past 3 weeks, SCOTUS made clear that this is not what ACA/Obamacare does…rather that it imposes a tax, which the federal government is well within its power to do and which any semi-reasonable citizen does not regard as extortion.

I know there are folks like Mr. Graham licking their wounds due to whipsaw of unfairly inflated-then-deflated expectations that were never realistic given the political realities at play, but I hope in time they will understand why many of us feel this is actually a very good day for America, and for all of Obama’s non-trivial faults, may be one of his finest hours.

StillUndecided

Yes – we all know that The Court determined it was a tax. But didn’t The President swear up and down that it was not a tax when it was proposed? Do you really think that it would have ever passed if it had been sold to the American people from the very beginning as a massive tax increase?

SDaedalus

Personally, I think ACA’s mandate could have been upheld under the Commerce Clause, but alas my ideas about constitutionality are as relevant as anyone else on these discussion threads (as in ‘not at all’ at least when SCOTUS has spoken an issue).

Nobody (including John Roberts himself in the weeks before the opinion was issued apparently) expected the ACA to be saved by the interpretation of the fine/mandate combo as a ‘tax’…it was an unexpected surprise for both sides of the issue, and by all accounts the result of an inexplicable change of heart by Roberts, who was lobbied hard by J. Kennedy to return to the conservative fold and strike the law down. Would it have passed Congress if it was described as a “tax”? Likely not. Can Obama be blamed for not describing it as a tax when he was lobbying for its passage? Sure, if you want to credit him with precognition of knowing of a fluke ruling of SCOTUS 2-3 years in the future. Some do say he is ‘magic’…maybe that is what they mean.

But for purpose of Graham’s letter and his central point — that the ACA’s individual mandate is an example of extortion/coercion by the government (which would in turn justify the House GOP using extortion/coercion to defund/delay it)– that very question was asked and answered in the negative by the highest court of the land.

toohip

Let’s be honest – SCOTUS has gone off the reservation, much like the Republican party. The term “activist judges” never so much applied to judges as it does to SCOTUS. The constant 5-4 votes right down political lines is an insult to this great institution. But for Roberts we’d have some other reason to shut down the Gov’t and threaten the faith and credit of the nation’s debt. ACA just managed to float by a well-organized conservative effort to kill “anything-Obama.” And the failure of Roberts (not SCOTUS) (google Roberts and Obamacare and check out all the hits about him being blackmailed and threats against him by the Tea Party) – just created an alternative tactic for the Republicans once again to get their way and continue to stagnate this country from entering the 21st century.

toohip

What difference does it make. . tax – not a tax? Or are you so desperate you’re clinging to some allegation “the President lied it was a tax!” as something that’s important to this debate? Do you feel safer that your “massive taxes” are paying for defense? Maybe keeping your health and the health of the others that build the infrastructure of the nation is important as well, and worthy of your taxes? Oh, wait, I forget. conservatism isn’t about giving a hand up, it’s about eating cake.

StillUndecided

I have stated many times that I am in favor of a single payer system. Yes – fully socialized medicine. I am also completely against the amount we spend on defense and being the world’s policeman. The ACA is a horrible law. If it had been pushed by someone other than Obama, you would probably agree that it was too. While I may lean conservative, I don’t let that rule my life.

tomfromthenews

Do you own a car, Cameron? Are you bothered by the fact that you must purchase insurance out of your own pocket to legally operate that car? You cannot drive, creating the possibility that you could injure others or destroy property, without such insurance just because you want to. And you cannot endanger the economy by risking possible catastrophic health care costs inflicted upon the general public just because you don’t think you should be insured. This is how it works. N’est-ce pas?

primafacie

We’ve been over this before, but I’ll glad to help you out again.

The purchase of liability insurance — as opposed to insurance for repairs or maintenance — is a condition for the privilege of operating a motor vehicle in many states, including this one. This is different from the insurance that covers repairs or replacement of your vehicle in the event of a loss. (Your mortgage carrier may also have a similar requirement to protect its investment in lending you money, again not a right.)

The purchase of health insurance — which covers, as it were, repairs or maintenance of yourself — is now a condition for a citizen’s right to exist.

There’s also the whole state vs. federal thing.

Guest

And why do you right wingers put more value in insuring your car and zero value in insuring your health, and possibly your life??

guest

Did you not read what he wrote? Liability insurance is required, not personal property insurance.

Guest

Did you not read what I wrote and comprehend????
Obviously not. But answer why you value your auto more than your health?

MD

Until a catastrophic health situation strikes. Then no doubt, health takes priority as opposed to “it won’t happen to me or my family.”

I guess in cases of accidents, the insured should continue to pick up the tab for the uninisured. Strange thinking for the party of personal responsibility.

guest

And what do you need for your system to work? The young and healthy need to come into the system and pay 2 to 4 times what they should to pay for the elderly and sick. Strange thinking for the party of “fairness.”

peterpi

You need to learn how insurance works.
For example, if 100% of all auto insurance policy holders had car crashes, the insurance industry wouldn’t be able to cover, because the premiums would be as if each holder had to pay for his or her own expenses.
Insurance is about “spreading the liability”, but that only works, if at any given time, a large pool of policy hoiders is paying for a small pool of liable people.
Health insurance needs healthy people to continue to pay premiums, even though they’re healthy, knowing their premiums are paying for others, plus overhead, in the knowledge that when the healthy people do get sick, they’ll be covered, and their expense will be smaller.
So, yes, insurance companies need the premiums of young healthy people who realize “Hey, it can’t happen to me” is liable to sock them with a $100,000 bill, their home imperiled, and their family wondering where their next meal will come from.
Or the cocky set can just declare bankruptcy, and get the government or the hospital to be stuck with the bill.
That’s not called freedom, that’s not called rugged individualism, it’s called selfishness.

guest

But if I have a Volkswagon and you have a Lamborghini, I should pay the same for liability as you would. (I thought I would let you dream)

guest

I missed a not after the should.

guest

Straw man argument.

Guest

Wrong as usual. Can’t answer the question….can you?

guest

An attempted trick question by you which is nothing more that a straw man.

Guest

Can’t answer the question can you?? No trick involved.

guest

Of course I can and I know what you would say. Nope, that is just a stupid straw man question.

Guest

Of course you won’t because you’d look stupid again!

peterpi

Use “straw man” one more time, and you may as well drop the masked-man “guest” camouflage and re-sign as “goodspkr”.

Guest

Now you’re catching on!

toohip

guest if the starter goes out in my car are you going to pay for it? No, but I don’t have health care ins., and I get cancer, you will! Thanks. The cheap, greedy, deniers thank you for covering them!

toohip

answer: that river in Egypt!

primafacie

The Mendesian or the Bolbitinic?

primafacie

You seem to be under the impression I don’t carry medical insurance. I do. I budget and make sacrifices in other areas to do so. And I agree that a responsible person would do the same. I also agree that responsible people wouldn’t bet more than they can afford on the lottery or maintain their furnace; there’s no legal requirement to that effect.

There is, however, a threat of legal penalty to behave in a way someone else has decided is responsible — a requirement that because someone exists they must make a specified consumer purchase. (The auto insurance comparison, which the pro-Obamacare crowd likes to use as well, illustrates the difference in principle between individual rights and privileges.)

The Constitution and legal system are designed and intended to protect individual rights, not to ensure that one behaves in someone else’s vision of responsibility.

(By the way, it was Tom who asked about auto insurance. I explained the difference between that liability coverage and medical coverage, as well as the difference between those two requirements.)

Guest

No I’m sure all you right wingers have your own insurance. But you’re willing to deny others the same. Preexisting conditions is something Obamacare is trying to address. Young people able to stay on their parents plan. It’s still “insurance” and if you’re not going to be responsible to “budget and make sacrifices”, then a push to be responsible and force me and you to pay for their emergency room charges and long hospital stays when that “accident” or illness strikes. Because you were young and/or foolish to believe it wouldn’t happen to you! “protect individual rights” is the usual right wing excuse. We’re talking people who want to have insurance but can’t afford or are denied. So again, I ask, why do you value your auto more than health care?

Guest

Should be a “NOT” in this line:

and force me and you to “NOT” pay for their emergency room charges and long hospital stays

Tbone

So why do the uninsured have a right to force me to pay for their healthcare?

guest

Because folks like yourself has said they have to.

Guest

Wrong as usual. Who pays for unpaid medical treatment at hospitals that the uninsured can’t pay, and when did “folks like yourself has said they have to.”???
Dumb, dumb statement.

guest

1986 and it was a democratic congress that passed the bill that made it the law.

Stupid, stupid, stupid response.

Guest

Which Reagan signed. So you would rather use your cold hearted idiotic reasoning to let folks suffer and die rather than to seek medical attention even if they have no insurance? And do you honestly believe that nobody went and was treated before that law?? Talk about stupid stupid stupid!!

guest

There’s that trick answer you would have given if I had answered your other question. If I say we do have health insurance than you would say you’d let other folks suffer and die. Obama may not be transparent, but you are.

Guest

Not a trick answer. That IS your answer. What else can it be? If people can’t go to the emergency room because they’re turned away, then what?? Oh, that’s a trick question??
And if they go anyway, law or no law, and get treated….who pays if they can’t? Oh another trick question??
You’re a one trick pony, goodspkr!!

guest

You are such a simpleton.

Guest

OOOOOOH! Another lame goodspkr insult!!

Tbone

I guess it’s just the christian in me!

peterpi

So we have a constitutional (some of your set would add “God-given”) right to NOT have health insurance, to sock it to others when our medical liability far exceeds our ability to pay.
I suppose restaurant owners, ideally, have a constitutional right to NOT maintain themselves so as to not sicken their patrons.
Lumber companies have a constitutional right to NOT practice good management and conservation techniques. It’s not their responsibility of floods cause landslides.
And so on.

Dave52

If you cancer, have a major accident, or anything that requires much more than a cast or bandaid, the cost rapidly escalates into the tens if not hundreds of thousands. I’d think that having a major medical policy might be the rough equivalent of liability insurance for your vehicle.

Of course if you wanted, you could buy a more comprehensive health policy, one that covers more stuff.

guest

I think a lot of conservative could be talked into a major medical policy for all Americans with a high deductible ($20,000 perhaps).

I think you would lose a lot of liberals with that idea.

toohip

Where your argument fails, prima, is that the cost of repairs and parts to your motor vehicle is NOT a liability of the rest of the tax payers, like health insurance is. If someone doesn’t get personal health care insurance, they become a liability to the tax payers. This is a FUNDAMENTAL issue of your party and group, which all falls under that “personal responsibility” you rant about. And let me remind all you usual suspects again, it was the REPUBLICANS through the development of an similar “individual mandate” by the Heritage Foundation, that started this whole concept of mandatory insurance. No group whines more than the right when they have to pick up the tab for people who lack the personal responsibility to take advantage of opportunities to save themselves and stay off the public dole.

primafacie

Do I “rant” about personal responsibility?

And just because I lean right politically I have to go along with everything the Heritage Foundation says? I’d better re-read my Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy card. I may have missed that provision.

toohip

You’re right (excuse pun), prima, I’m generalizing with your message, and that was wrong, because you DO offer rational thought here on occasion. But you DO wax conservative, and my point stands about the analogy. I don’t think I said “you” claim personal responsiblity, but the group you often support does. It, you?, go with the territory. As once said. . own it! Don’t fart and blame it on the dog!”

primafacie

Fair enough. But simply because I align with a given political party doesn’t mean I share each and every view, position or policy that party holds.

tomfromthenews

I voted up for the last sentence! LOL

peterpi

Line 1024.5.501(aa)

guest

55555555 I liked the 501 portion.

toohip

Oui!

toohip

Nice try, Mr. Graham, but utter. . FAIL!
This is what the Republican brand has become utter and outrageous malfeasance and fraud, be they no longer carry the will of the people and their brand his quickly fading. They can’t win elections because they make them about single issue campaigns such as “stop Obamacare” and “stop Obama socialism.” So if you can’t change. . or stop change. . the lies, the fears and loathing don’t work. . you turn to the extortion everyone accepts as the tactic tried and failed. What the Tea Party-run Republicans did accomplish is to kick the can down the road for a fight another day. . a day they hope the people won’t be paying attention to their strong arm tactics. They’re banking on the tendency of the American people, who are ignored by a failed Fourth Estate, to provide the truth and reality for which they seek. Instead they get bought and paid for (“corporations are people too, my friend!”) cable news, who find that entertainment/drama news sells more than boring reality of a political party hijacked by a minority extremist group, trying to drag the country back to the 1950’s. Meanwhile spinners like Mr. Graham continue to spin another Republican failure to hijack the nation to get what they want, rather than what the people want.

MD

Then Mr. Graham also has no car or home insurance, and he believes the insured should continue to pick up the annual tab of approximately $1,000 per family to cover treatment for the uninsured? The problem with the Affordable Care Act is the premium pricing is left in the hands of the insurance industry.

To believe holding the entire global economy hostage to get what you want isn’t extortion? It’s important to bear in mind that Congress holds the purse strings. It approved the expenses incurred, and then refused to pay for them unless its demands were met — demands that echoed the Romney platform. You remember Romney, the guy who lost the 2012 election.

peterpi

But, but, but! That’s different. Romney was a Republican! Romney was “not Obama”.
Obama could come out tomorrow for repealing all income taxes on dividends and interest … and the Republicans would immediately reject Obama’s plan as a communist re-distributionist socialist liberal plot.
Obama could come out tomorrow in favor of eliminating virtually all gun-control laws, and Republicans would denounce him for wanting to turn the USA into a Wild West movie set.
Whatever Obama endorses, even if Republicans had proposed it, is now dead.
Obama could denounce single payer, and the Tea Party would be clamoring for it, and threatening to shut down the government unless it passed.
Say, … I wonder how I get hold of Obama’s appointments secretary.

guest

You really don’t understand the “power of the purse.”

johnrpack

I don’t mind either the House or the President taking strong positions and sticking to them. In fact, it’s a refreshing change.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.